(14-02-2014 03:12 AM)nach_in Wrote: I think euthanasia should be considered a human right, so that's good news imo.

What about selling (or renting) your body parts?

Subject is off-topic and considering your reputation, I wonder which logical fallacy you're going to use next? Reductio ad absurdum or the slippery slope fallacy? Maybe someting more creative? You know, atheists chopping up babies for profit?

Please share your insights on the subject at hand and use arguments to explain your thesis. "Jeebus sez its wrooong and ya'all baby eators gonna BURN in hell" isn't an argument, so please refrain from using it.

I had a niece who died of cancer. She was diagnosed at the age of 1 with terminal cancer. Her mother was told treatments could extend her life; her mother chose treatments. They (the medical community) began treatments on her right away.

Tara lived four more years in pain and suffering. The last 8 mo. of her existence consisted of sign language tutoring because her treatments had rendered her deaf, and she was going blind. I remember looking at her little dried husk of body, laying in a coffin and thinking, she doesn't look human, but more like an off planet alien.

Some time after Tara's death, her mother and I spoke. At the initial diagnoses, the treating doctors did not encourage Tara's mother to think about refusing treatments. And legally would they have let her? The idea presented to her was one of life even though Tara's little body never had a chance. Her mother is haunted with the long and horrific death her child experienced.

When the diagnosis is terminal, the quietest, most painless death should be within reach. I always believed the medical community was criminal in Tara's case.

"If you want a happy ending, that depends, of course, on where you stop your story." Orson Welles

I was going to mention that I am in the USA. In comparison to Belgium, it may make a difference. Maybe they have a higher social consciousness or have managed to understand death as the most critical member of life.

The medical focus here seems to be not the quality of life that one has, but that one has life, and more and more . . . For most of the people I know here, in the US, friends, family, and acquaintances, death is a terrible thing to put off at all cost.

I believe for a people to come to believe in euthanasia to the degree children should also be granted choice in the event of a death struggle, something is happening that we in the states are very far from assuming.

"If you want a happy ending, that depends, of course, on where you stop your story." Orson Welles

Subject is off-topic and considering your reputation, I wonder which logical fallacy you're going to use next? Reductio ad absurdum or the slippery slope fallacy? Maybe someting more creative? You know, atheists chopping up babies for profit?

Please share your insights on the subject at hand and use arguments to explain your thesis. "Jeebus sez its wrooong and ya'all baby eators gonna BURN in hell" isn't an argument, so please refrain from using it.

Have a pleasant day, sir.

My 'thesis' is that children can't give informed consent.
If they CAN, then Belgium is setting a landmark legal precedent.

You don't mind if I use the term 'legal precedent' as code for slippery slope do you? Sorry if the implications make you squeamish.